Colombia’s presidential candidates May 2010 – From an Idol to a President

by Luis Fernando Rios[1]

This article provides an analysis of Colombia’s presidential elections. It starts with a brief description of the context surrounding the elections in Colombia, including Uribe’s role in the current political environment. Next, a short analysis of the candidates is presented. Follow by a proposal for a transparent national coalition as a means to improve Colombian’s conditions. It is suggested that the political landscape in Colombia is in need of real Presidents, not idols.

Based on an understanding about modern political and social institutions (rules of the game – mechanisms of social order governing the behaviour of individuals in a particular collectivity) and their importance for a country’s sustainability, it could be argued that Uribe has weakened many of Colombia’s democratic institutions. Uribe ran his initial campaign based on “democratic security” focused on fighting the guerrilla and ending corruption. He has failed on both of them:

Guerrillas are a symptom of a 60 year problem rooted in high levels of social inequality, which still remains. Focusing on fighting the guerrillas (which the majority of Colombians supported) was a poor strategy. Sadly, is not only Uribe to be blamed, he did what many Colombians where expecting of him. It seems like we choose historically to solve our problems through violent means. Uribe’s mandates have not resulted in decreasing drug activity, related to guerrillas funding. Control of drug trafficking has simply shifted from guerrillas to paramilitaries. For some, including myself, it seems that the cure (paramilitaries) devised “un officially” to fight guerrillas, can be worse than the illness itself (guerrilla).  However, Uribe’s failure to end corruption seems to be his administration’s greatest defeat. Indeed, Transparency International has downgraded Colombia in its corruption index in the last years. Strong evidence suggests Uribe and his Congressional allies, bought the re election acceptance at the Constitutional level (constitution is the most important formal institution). Many could argue that as Berlusconi’s influence in Italy, Uribe’s media control with congress and judicial sector support prevents relevant investigations.

But, why this context? His desire for a third re election, going (again) against the Colombian Constitution, provided a political unstable environment where it seems some Colombians allowed him to be above the law. Three months ago, nobody could predict what would happen in the elections because Uribe has shattered the correct procedures that made Colombia known as Latin America’s longest “democracy”, yet because of media control and excellent image strategies, 60% of Colombians love Uribe. And this is true; they love him, nothing else.  Here is when the slang “el amor es ciego” applies. He has become more of an idol than a president. And this is not only a Colombian issue; some could argue it is a Latin American “failure” to put leaders in a status where almost anything is forgiven. Each country has its own examples.

Many Colombians close their brain to scandals such as “Falsos Positivos” and the findings behind “Chuzadas del DAS” because they “love” the guy. As state leader, Uribe should be held accountable for these atrocities. Instead, this perception of Uribe as an idol rather than as a head of state has created a political environment where people choose how to vote on personality and popularity, rather than on experience and agenda.  Now let’s move to the candidates (clarifying that we should be grateful as they have good political record and seem as capable individuals):

Pardo: In my opinion by far the strongest candidate on paper. Excellent record in both, appointed and elected political roles. What a CV. What a record of Colombian willingness for good and commitment. But he lacks charisma. I agree with him that people should value competence over charisma. But charisma is a key characteristic of an idol and some Colombians are looking for an idol replacement. He has one month to prove he has the resolve to break a corrupted Congress (cleaning his party, good first step). If not, his promises will never be more than that, promises. He was the best during the televised debates. I question why Pardo looked for the wrong side of the left and did not look for leaders like Lucho on this side of the spectrum.

Noemi: As a woman in Colombia, the continued popular support she has sustained is extraordinary. She has talent and charisma but her time has passed. Furthermore, some Colombians felt she betrayed Uribe, and betraying the idol is never a good card to play. She was the weaker during the debates. But she holds the future of Colombia in her hands: she is a believer in Mockus’ approach. They have already run for a presidential candidacy together. Strategically, and to show her love of the country, it would be wise for her to unite before first run with Mockus and give Colombia a chance for long term development. The corrupted conservatives who supported Arias (who can explain how he ran for pre –candidate after the Ingreso Seguro scandal?) will go against her; but she should not care. Honest and transparent Conservatives would honour and respect her for this decision.

Mockus: Intelligent, structured and a good strategist, definitely an excellent candidate. Importantly he is “one of us”; a common Colombian. He is clean of corruption, with a good political record in Bogota. He has played good political cards with Penalosa and Lucho, both capable leaders who believe more in implementation than in wasted political ideological fights. They want to build a president and the nation in a transparent and honest way, not create an idol cultivated through lies. They have sent the correct message to honest and hard working Colombians and that’s why they have been surprisingly successful. The country needs to think long term for the first time. We need to focus on education, giving back to the poor by providing them with long term capabilities and at the same time focus on short term efforts for employment, more social justice and primarily a state that does not steal from its own citizens. They don’t have the political machinery but they have the charismatic machinery of three very good ex Bogota mayors. They need to make the correct national alliances, as they just did with Fajardo, to get votes from other regions, without falling into the political trap of sleeping with the enemy. They need to include people that attract votes but are clean of corruption and bad practices.

Santos: Good speaker, intelligent individual, result oriented, but it could be argued that the Colombian right has hurt the country badly, especially in the last few years. And he represents the extreme right. Paramilitaries are stronger than ever (especially in drug trafficking and land control). Furthermore, scandals such as Falsos Positivos and DAS Chuzadas are unacceptable. As ex defence ministry, Santos should be made directly accountable for these scandals. I will never believe that the solution to Colombia’s problems is killing each other or our neighbours.  It is highly possible that if Santos becomes president, a war with Chavez (not Venezuelans) will start. Worse is that the poorest Colombians suffer the consequence of war: almost all soldiers, paramilitaries and guerrilleros come from the poorest families. The problem rises in other circles of society. I think Santos is one of the worst candidates, and would be a catastrophic continuation of Uribe’s dirty tactics to achieve long term “false results”. Colombians should open their eyes: these types of people believe that the end justifies the means, even if the means are corruption, data manipulation or launching terror attacks in the name of others (as the DAS scandal proved the state was doing). Colombians cannot be blind to the fact that it is highly possible that Uribe and his ex-Defense Minister (Santos) were the intellectual authors of such a disgrace.

Lleras: Every candidate and political party with proven ties to the paramilitaries should not be allowed to compete; the same for those with proven links to the current guerrillas (although, if ties to guerrillas and paramilitaries barred politicians, we would probably run out of congress). He is a charismatic individual with a strategic political record, but with a party on his back heavily related with paramilitary scandals. A couple of years ago he was thought to be another “idol replacement”, but he is paying the same price as Noemi. Betraying an idol is never good. But Lleras is paying a higher price by helping build Uribe as an idol; “a taste of his own medicine”.

Petro: He is one of the strongest candidates coming from the militant left. Let’s put it simply: being voted the best congressman in Colombia and coming from the left, he has the charisma and knowledge. Good academic and political practical record. Clara Lopez, his vice president is a strong leader coming from what was left from the UP (a political tragedy forgotten in Colombian’s history) with all the technical and administrative expertise that Petro lacks. However, he does not have the correct communication strategy to get to the majority of the middle class and has not cleaned the Polo of its radical’s streams. This is going to hurt him. Until the Polo cleans its internal mess, none of its leaders will achieve presidential power. However, Petro is an idol for few, and a strong president for some; a strong combination. Unfortunately for many “cynic and without memory” Colombians, he is just an ex guerrillero. 

Thinking of a sustainable Colombia, believing in institutions and not in idol- leaders such as Uribe or Santos who think that the problems of Colombia can be solved by killing each other- I strongly believe a coalition between Mockus and Noemi will lead Colombia to a positive second round. On second round Pardo can unite with Mockus and Noemi in a path of peace and development for the country. Before hand, Pardo and Noemi have to do the hard task of cleaning their parties from all those corrupted politicians who have damaged the image of the country. Mockus will have the unprecedented power to ask them to do so, before any political national coalition. They need to be supported by strong and intelligent leaders such as Lucho (already in) and Petro in the left. Colombia has been at war for more than 60 years; our problems will not be solved by more war. Therefore, our vote should never go to candidates that propose war as a solution. If you believe in education, culture, a transparent state and the respect for institutions your vote will go for Mockus. We will have a president, not an idol, which will do what is needed for Colombia’s social and economic development and reduction in inequality. Especially by changing the way many Colombians think about the solution of our long lasting problems.

Finally, we must learn some lessons from developed nations. Elections should have debate but this needs to be done in a peaceful way and with respect to whoever wins. As you may gathered from this article, my proposed solution to better and long lasting development for Colombia is a national coalition between Mockus (as main leader), Noemi and Pardo. Petro should be well received. The coalition should build Mockus as president, not an idol replacement. This will allow Mockus to win but also to execute because he would have a majority in Congress. BUT for it to be transparent Noemi, Pardo and Petro should clean their up parties before joining in coalition. I repeat it is a hard task, but now is the time to do it: they should do the difficult work of kicking out all of their members who have been proven corrupt and temporarily throw out those who are under serious investigations.

---

[1] Luis Fernando Rios: MSc in Development Management, London School of Economics. Master in Economics and BA in Business, Javeriana University (PUJ). Currently works as Senior Financial Analyst in the UK; leader of the UK - PUJ alumni network. He is former World Bank Staff and professor at PUJ.